|
How conservatives are moved leftward
The Hegelian Mambo (also known as the liberal co-option of conservatives) continues apace. Here’s a “conservative” drawn in a leftward direction by a leftist politician’s adoption of a single (albeit important) exception to his overall leftism. After Prime Minister Blair gave his speech to Congress supporting President Bush and the war on terrorism, T. King of Manhattan wrote this letter to the New York Post:
When Tony Blair was elected prime minister, I thought he was a Bill Clinton aspirant. I take back all of my negative remarks regarding this stalwart statesman. [Emphasis added.]So, in the future, we can expect that when T. King hears conservatives complain about Blair’s pushing for a globalist world order, or instituting a reign of political correctness in Britain, or talking of “sweeping away all those forces of conservatism,” or claiming that the real danger of Muslim terrorism is that it will make Westerners less tolerant of Islam, he will dismiss it all. Having stood by the U.S. against Saddam Hussein, Blair will henceforth get a pass for the entirety of his leftist agenda. And of course it’s not just lowly letter writers to the New York Post who have this reaction. It’s all manner of conservative opinion makers.
To paraphrase Puck in A Midsummer Night’s Dream: Lord, how easy these conservatives are. Comments
I confess that I feel a certain inexpressible affection for Tony Blair, but I fear that he is just a dreary fraud. Posted by: Paul Cella on July 22, 2003 12:14 AMWhat is the cause of this affection? Posted by: Lawrence Auster on July 22, 2003 12:32 AMBlair is a dreary fraud, and sanctimonious to boot. He is also a traitor to his country (Scotland and/or the UK; take your pick) and people. How someone as intelligent as Mr. Cella evidently is could feel any affection for him is beyond me. Still, not everyone in the United Kingdom is an idiot, and Blair has led “New” Labour to two landslide victories. There’s no accounting for national tastes in politicians. The British throw up Blair, the French heave up Chirac, the Americans toss up Bush - and who was that loveable lug we had until a few years ago? The Western democracies seem better than usual these days at elevating charlatans. HRS Posted by: Howard Sutherland on July 22, 2003 10:48 AMWell, I don’t have to live under his rule is probably the better part of the explanation for my sentiment. Also, I had my ambivalence about the Iraq war, but in the end I supported it. There is a twinge of appreciation for his willingness to stand with America in war, even if I was unsure of the justice of her war. Posted by: Paul Cella on July 22, 2003 10:38 PMI also give him a lot of credit for standing by us. At times it took real courage when he was standing against his party. But giving him credit is not the same thing as uncritically embracing him—and that’s what American conservatives and Republicans have done to their utter shame. I don’t know why people are unable to make these distinctions. One one hand, Blair’s alliance with us in the war was very important and one should appreciate that. On the other hand he is a leftist who believes ultimately in the destruction of everything we love, not through war but cultural subversion. Why can’t people count up to two, and realize that both things—Blair as war ally, Blair as cultural leftist—are true? Why are they only able to count up to one? Posted by: Lawrence Auster on July 23, 2003 1:45 AMThis almost pitiful lack of sophistication among conservatives and Republicans is evident elsewhere. I cited the example of the conservative embrace of Christopher Hitchens last week on VFR. Can we not hold two thoughts in our heads at the same time? Part of the dominance of the neoconservatives is exemplified by the almost palpable relief that 9/11 brought conservatives in concentrating their minds on a foreign threat (note that I am not for moment suggesting the they *desired* such a horrific event). They needed another Cold War, as it were; because on domestic issues they were complacent and unmotivated. When the event came, it became the focal point of all their energies, essentially eclipsing all else. Posted by: Paul Cella on July 23, 2003 2:26 AM |